[YB-1] 7月13号作业 by weenbopper

weenbopperUID: 2423595

Grounding on a comparison of tow studies -- the first one shows that the Leeville citizens preferred literacy classics as reading material, and the later one demonstrates that mystery novel was checked out the most in every public libraries in Leeville, the arguer accordingly judge fallacy in the first study. A careful analysis would reveal how groundless this claim is.

At first, the take-up of the respondents in both these studies should be concerned. The first one, which is conducted by the University, is possible a study mainly focus on the students in the college for saving time, energy and other resources. Meanwhile, the respondents in the second studies are composed by the individuals who has already entered society and thus inevitably suffered more pressure than college students. In this sense, those respondents in the follow-up study might borrow mystery novel that can efficiently release their pressure.

Subsequently, literacy classics or reading material is not necessarily inconsistent with mystery novel. It is highly possible that a mystery novel owns high position in literacy classics; also, the reading material could contain some part of mystery novel. Therefore, we have no reason to doubt the trustworthiness of the first claim either the second one.

Finally, we can not simply ascribe the possible incompleteness or fallacy to the second one just from the temporal order. The follow-up study may adopt some advanced technique or skills that result in the failure. Moreover, no evidence shows the temporal gap between these tow studies. With the development of technology, humanity and our habits, our modern citizens maybe tremendously transfer their reading habit. In this sense, it is groundless to judge the fallacy in the first study.

In sum, in order to substantiate his claim, the arguer should prove the identical composition of the two studies and find some other mistake or fallacy in the first study.

xxhhttUID: 2477361

Grounding on a comparison of tow studies -- the first one shows that the Leeville citizens preferred literacy classics as reading material, and the later one demonstrates that mystery novel was checked out the most in every public libraries（library） in Leeville, the arguer accordingly judge fallacy in the first study. A careful analysis would reveal how groundless this claim is.
(晕，最后一句我见过好几次了)

At first, the take-up of the respondents in both these studies should be concerned. The first one, which is conducted by the University, is possible a study mainly focus on the students in the college for saving time, energy and other resources. （这点批驳我不赞同，不应对study本身进行批驳，你可以查下版内关于这方面的讨论）Meanwhile, the respondents in the second studies are composed by the individuals who has already entered society and thus inevitably suffered more pressure than college students. In this sense, those respondents in the follow-up study might borrow mystery novel that can efficiently release their pressure.（你的想象力很丰富，但是这种情况的可能性不大，我觉得还是例子接近 “常识“，比较好）

Subsequently, literacy classics or reading material is not necessarily inconsistent with mystery novel. It is highly possible that a mystery novel owns high position in literacy classics; also, the reading material could contain some part of mystery novel. Therefore, we have no reason to doubt the trustworthiness of the first claim either the second one.（恩，可以举些例子）

Finally, we can not simply ascribe the possible incompleteness or fallacy to the second one just from the temporal order. The follow-up study may adopt some advanced technique or skills that result in the failure. Moreover, no evidence shows the temporal gap between these tow studies. With the development of technology, humanity and our habits, our modern citizens maybe tremendously transfer their reading habit. In this sense, it is groundless to judge the fallacy in the first study.（我没太读懂，望附中文提纲）
In sum, in order to substantiate his claim, the arguer should prove the identical composition of the two studies and find some other mistake or fallacy in the first study.
开头模板化，这可能使阅卷人对下面的精彩论证失去兴趣
此文中，对于study本身的批驳，我表示不赞同by xxhhtt
我的文章在你楼上，回拍下我的吧